The Monitor has a new poll out, and once again Obama is in the lead, and once again, just barely. But it's the words in the second graf that really caught my eye:The poll suggests that the Democratic race could hinge on the turnout of undeclared voters, who aren't registered with either political party. Much of Obama's backing comes from undeclared voters, while registered Democrats make up the bulk of Clinton's support. In New Hampshire, undeclared voters can vote in either party primary, giving them sway in both contests.
"The more undeclared voters that decide to vote in the Democratic primary, the better chance Obama wins," said Del Ali, president of Research 2000, the Maryland-based nonpartisan polling firm that conducted the poll for the Monitor on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. "What Hillary Clinton has to hope is that more of the established Democrats come out to vote." I've been reading over and over in the press how Clinton guru Mark Penn's strategy is to treat Senator Clinton's candidacy as if she were the incumbent in the race, creating that natural edge incumbents always have.
But what strikes me as fascinating is that it was that very situation that helped challenger Paul Hodes against incumbent Rep. Charlie Bass two years ago in the congressional elections. When Paul was up just barely, and there were only a few days left, the conventional wisdom was that undecided voters (here in some ways analogous to undeclareds) would break with the challenger. And they did, by and large.
And as much as I avoided polls heretofore (especially in light of my favorite, Chris Dodd), it's no longer possible to say that they don't matter at this point in the race.
I'm totally on board with Jim Splaine: let Hillary be Hillary. Do that and she wins decisively, imho. |